Kinematic analysis of a newly designed cable-driven manipulator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the cable routing configurations for a cable-driven manipulator are introduced, and the impact of motion coupling caused by cable transmission routing of a 2n type cable-driven manipulator is analyzed in detail. Based on different configurations of cable routings, the relationship between variation of joint angles and the geometrical sizes of guide pulleys is established, represented by a matrix for coupled motion. Moreover, based on the effects of the motion coupling of a cable-driven manipulator, we propose the condition for the invariance of orientation, which can be achieved constraining of the geometrical sizes of guide pulleys and driven wheels. In addition, to identify the correctness of analysis for coupled motion, a 3-DOFs planer cable-driven manipulator prototyping model is constructed, and the kinematics and trajectory planning has been solved. Finally, the relationship among actuator space, joint space, and Cartesian space, including the mapping of the motion coupling, is experimentally validated. The property of invariance of orientation is also validated by an experiment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".